The main contradiction espoused by Ibish is that Hamas has both a religious and a nationalist agenda, intertwined and at odds with one another. It is true that, as a Muslim Brotherhood byproduct, Hamas has the desire to establish Islamic rule in Palestine, with no Israel in sight. Nevertheless, the major ideological difference between the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas (something Ibish did not point out) is that the Muslim Brotherhood seeks to resurrect the Islamic Empire (aka the Caliphate) through peaceful means, mostly through preaching and missionaries, before dealing with Israel’s existence and freeing Palestine.
Hamas, however, does not want to wait till that happens. Hamas believes that freeing Palestine (i.e. eradicating Israel) is a prerequisite to the resurrection of the Islamic Empire (the reverse strategy of Muslim Brotherhood central), thus permitting and requiring armed resistance against Israeli Occupation.
This resolves the first mysterious contradiction of intertwining theological and national aspirations: Hamas believes that freeing Palestine, on a nationalist agenda, is the first step towards the Palestinian Muslim’s bigger aim of resurrecting the Muslim Caliphate on all Muslim-majority lands (of which Palestine is only a province).
The second contradiction in his article is “the fact that Hamas is the only Sunni Islamist party in the Arab world to be simultaneously part of the Muslim Brotherhood network and the largely Shia pro-Iranian alliance.” In other words, how can Hamas be Sunni, while in coalition with a Shia entity? Of course the contradiction is only valid in the wording. Hamas is not part of any Shia pro-Iranian alliance. It is this so-called Shia pro-Iranian alliance that chooses to support Hamas, not because its members are Muslim, but because they are fighting against Israel (the common enemy of all Arab and Iranian factions).
The mass majority of Fatah’s members are Muslims too! Yet they get no direct support from Iran because Fatah has openly colluded with the enemy (Israel) against all other Palestinian and Lebanese factions of all faiths, sects, and ideologies. The article also insinuates that to be pro-Iranian you have to be Shiite, thus adding to the mystical Sunni Hamas collaboration with Iran. There is no mystery here. The Middle East alliances are not based on Sunni/Shiite, Muslim/Christian identities, but on the pro Palestine and the pro US-Israel camps. As a Lebanese, Ibish knows this.
The article brings up another false contradiction: “Hamas’ conduct needs to be viewed in the context of its primary strategic aim, which is to politically defeat the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority, and replace them as the primary agent for the Palestinian national movement.” A very dangerous, easy-to-miss fallacy is embedded in this statement which equates the PLO with the PA. Yes, Hamas aims to defeat and replace the Fatah-dominated PA, but certainly not the PLO. The PLO, for example, includes other active Palestinian factions (aside from Fatah), such as the People’s Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) which is a Marxist, secular movement that predates Hamas by twenty years. The PFLP today is, and has been for a decade, a strategic ally of Hamas. There have been hundreds of collaborated rocket attacks between these two parties (and several others), despite their deep ideological differences.
On the Palestinian political/ideological spectrum, Hamas (far right) has so much more in common with Fatah (center-right), than with the PFLP (left). Yet Hamas and PFLP were able to overcome their political/ideological differences and work together for their one and only true strategic aim: to defeat Israel, not the PLO or Fatah! It is Fatah and the PA (created by Israel) that are in collusion with Israel and constantly put themselves willingly (for money) at the Israeli front lines as proxies to fight Hamas and the entire Palestinian population, on behalf of Israel.
It is true, as Ibish insinuates here and in previous articles, that most Palestinians identify, politically and ideologically, with Fatah (centrist group). But they do not identify with Fatah’s actions! That is exactly why they have overwhelmingly voted for Hamas in the elections of 2006 – not because they approve of Hamas’s ideological views, but because they approve of Hamas’s actions. What did Hamas do with all its financial resources? It built schools, libraries, hospitals, and mosques (nothing wrong with building a place of worship). What did Fatah do with all its financial resources (which far exceed those of Hamas)? It bought Audis and Mercedes-Benzes for its members, purchased mansions and privately-owned businesses to make a profit off the already suffering Palestinians, and put the remaining millions of dollars and euros in secret Swiss bank accounts.
The truth is, Fatah chose financial corruption and military collusion with Israel over the interests of the Palestinian people, and over the plight for an independent state based on the 1967 borders. Fatah destroyed its popular base by its own actions! And the people, desperate for aid and for the end of occupation, turned to the only alternative still allowed to exist, Hamas (Israel had actively crushed all other alternative political parties), and voted them into government to end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, not to impose a religious lifestyle. And suddenly Israel showed its true colors! Israel never had the intention to dismantle settlements or end the occupation. So when Hamas, a more honest representative of the Palestinian people’s plight, made that demand in accordance with international law and signed agreements, Israel (and Fatah) waged war on Hamas, coming up with the most insane reasons to why they refuse to even negotiate with Hamas, such as their refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist. How come Israel never demanded that from Fatah while it was in power and involved in peace talks for over a decade?
When authors bring up the Hamas so-called coup d’etat in Gaza, they conceal the fact that this coup d’etat came only after Mahmoud Abbas fired the democratically elected Ismael Haniyyeh along with his entire elected government from office, and Fatah brigades received large shipments of weapons from the CIA in preparation to annihilate Hamas in Gaza once and for all. Hamas found out about this, and quickly moved to preemptively take over the Fatah-run “security” apparatus. The real coup d’etat was that of Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah; a failed coup d’etat that is. As a result of Hamas’s de facto takeover of the security apparatus in Gaza, crime and corruption have been falling steadily according to independent statistics, despite the Israeli economic and military blockade. The majority of Palestinians in Gaza, including those who are not ideologically aligned with Hamas, admit that law and order have much more respect under Hamas rule, and that Hamas security and police forces are manifold more disciplined than Fatah’s.
All these noncontroversial facts are obscured from the article. As a secularist myself, I can’t help but agree with Ibish’s distaste to some of Hamas’s fantastic views on the great resurrection of the Islamic Empire. But also as a secularist, I can easily see why a secular party like the PFLP had no choice but to side with Hamas in its struggle for justice and freedom for Palestine.
No comments:
Post a Comment